Tube or solid state?

DVV · « **on:** 30 Jan 2003, 09:26 pm »

Well, the old dilemma - tube or solid state?

Both camps have their proponents, both have their opponents.

Where do you stand?

Do you think either is better?

Do you think tubes have a magic all of their own?

Or do you feel they fall short on bass, and hype the midrange?

Fire away.

Cheers,
DVV

JoshK · « **Reply #1 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 09:32 pm »

Its been my experience through the ones I have heard....

Tubes tend to fall short on the bass with full range speakers, haven't heard a tube amp that doesn't although I haven't heard the Wolcott presence mono's. Some sound very very close to the better SS amps, which I think they should, if both were designed well. I think designs are starting to get better enough that the issue isn't which tech but how the implementation was done.

I know those that insist on tubes....to me that neccessarily means they insist on coloration in their system. The tube components without color sound like the SS components without color.

DVV · « **Reply #2 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 09:36 pm »

Quote from: JoshK

Its been my experience through the ones I have heard....

Tubes tend to fall short on the bass with full range speakers, haven't heard a tube amp that doesn't although I haven't heard the Wolcott presence mono's. Some sound very very close to the better SS amps, which I think they should, if both were designed well. I think designs are starting to get better enough that the issue isn't which tech but how the implementation was done.

I know those that insist on tubes....to me that neccessarily means they insist on coloration in their system. The tube components without color sound like the SS components without color.

Best goddamn post I read in years - damn well done, Josh old son! Congratulations!

I couldn't agree more.

Cheers,
DVV

Tyson · « **Reply #3 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 09:47 pm »

I like tube preamps w/ solid state amps. If both are well done, the synergy can be very good.

DVV · « **Reply #4 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 09:59 pm »

Quote from: Tyson

I like tube preamps w/ solid state amps. If both are well done, the synergy can be very good.

Also very logical, Tyson. Greatly simplified, one could say that in general, tubes don't mind voltages but dislike currents, whereas transistors don't mind currents but dislike voltages.

Therefore, in preamps, where voltages are required but with very little current, tubes are a good choice, whereas in power amps, tremendous currents are required and hence transistors represent a better choice.

Because of this, your comment on synergy can be very, very true if, as you say, one gets it right - and getting it right is half the fun, isn't it?

Cheers,
DVV

JohnR · « **Reply #5 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 10:11 pm »

Personally, I think it's a bit silly to label tubes "colored." I think a great deal of solid state (that I've heard, meaning reasonably affordable) is as or more "colored" than tubes. It's an uglier color, though, that's the difference

Hantra · « **Reply #6 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 10:13 pm »

Well, I had a foray into hybrid with Jolida for a while, and then I switched that out for a pair of Marantz MA-700's which I hated. I got the Audio Note just for a demo, and I had no intention of buying anything that high-end, or all tube.

When I heard it for the first time, it had more bass than the 300 watt monoblocks it replaced! It is soooooo many worlds apart from those monos, and quite a sum better than the Jolida as well, although it was a heck of an amp.

Anyhow, I have since rolled from cheapo Chinese tubes over to a Svetlana 6L6GC matched quad, a pair of Philips NOS JAN 6SL6WGT for the power tubes, and a pair of Tesla NOS ECC083S for pre-amp tubes. The most amazing sound is now coming out of my speakers. I wish for a bit more bass, but I can't complain a bit.

Soon I am going to try out Scott Nixon's amps. I'll try them with a passive, and with the AN as a pre. Perhaps that'll be the right combo for me. If not, I am getting a couple subs! Thanks to everyone who had that suggestion. I never thought of it. My speakers play plenty low for me, but they also are not bi-wireable, so. . . What can you do?

Anyway, I am addicted to the listenability of my system, even on poor recordings. The AN with the Nixon DAC is amazing! As a matter of fact, I am going to listen now. .

Bye guys!

B

audiojerry · « **Reply #7 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 10:13 pm »

I have a feeling this is going to be a very long thread...now you've done it DVV!

I will admit to having owned too many toys, and I've owned a fair share of debatably highly regarded components of both types. I believe there is a sonic quality that decisively separates the two. It may not be immediate, but it has always been easy to distinguish the difference for me, and even easier for my wife.

But I do not think this difference is due to coloration or lack thereof. I believe it may be due more to harmonics and which order of distortion artifacts are present.

I will get into it more later, but for me, regardless of how resolving, or powerful, or fast, or accurate a solid state amp design is, every one I have listened to at length lacks an organic quality that I have only found in tubes. There is a naturalness and a smoothness that is more agreeable to my nerve endings and allows me to be more relaxed when listening. With solid state I always feel more tense and less satisfied at the end of a listening session.

I do believe, though, that it is more diificult to reach a tube based system's maximum potential, and one needs to be more careful with matching the right speakers, components and cables.

I'd also bet that there are more solid state owners who have permanently crossed over to the bottle side than vice versa. That might make for a good survey.

Nikko · « **Reply #8 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 11:27 pm »

I agree with Audiojerry completely. I can listen to music for hours without fatigue through a good tube amp. For years I ran a tube preamp/solid amp combo and, at least in my setup, it never satisfied me completely. I run a Sonic Frontiers Power 2 which is said to be more solid state sounding than most tube amps but it still has enough of the organic quality that Audiojerry described to satisfy. Even my fiancee, who doesn't give a rats behind about my crazy hobby, was struck by how much more involving music is through glass.

Dan Banquer · « **Reply #9 on:** 30 Jan 2003, 11:38 pm »

Well Jerry you got the main part of this controversey. The stereotype as it exists today is that tubes give lots of even order distortion and SS gives odd order distortion. Note the word stereotype. SS can be designed NOT to give audible odd order distortion and better tube designs can give less distortion. I think the distortion spectra is definetly part of it. The other part is frequency response. Tubes are typically weak in the bottom and top end. If your speaker has a poorly designed tweeter, which is unfortunately the norm these days than cutting the frequency response can be less offensive. If the problem is the speaker, I think people need to address that. If the problem is that acoustic room treatment then that should be addressed. Too often in this business people keep running out and buying different hardware when the problem lies elsewhere.
Personally my view is that tubes are great for microwave ovens and high power RF. I do not care for the added distortion components or the noise or the heat or the lack of reliability of tubes.

SFDude · « **Reply #10 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 02:14 am »

Let's just say that neither one is better than the other. It all boils down to a matter of preference.

I actually feel that SS works well on certain kinds of music (bass-heavy, droning, trip-hoppy, ambient beat music) and tubes work well on others (jazz vocals, intimate chamber music). I have been in both camps at one point or another and will probably end up continuing to jump back and forth between tubes and SS. They both possess qualities that I enjoy and I am sometimes surprised when a SS design comes close to the warmth that tubes provide (PS Audio HCA-2 for example) and a tube design that comes close to the control that SS provides (Art Audio for example).

But, after all, it really boils down to personal preference. I'm currently in the tube camp but this could all change when a new design comes out that is all SS but sounds very enchanting.

This is a can of worms that I will continue to leave alone so take these as just personal comments and that I have no conviction either way. Just enjoy the music silly!

-Dave

cjr888 · « **Reply #11 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 02:14 am »

Our source of the day we will simply call 'our source' -- it might be analog, it might be CD, we don't know, we don't care.

Whether simply the output stage of our source, or as a preamplifier, or directly off the source, we have some form of voltage gain -- tube or solid state. Its characteristics are whatever you want them to be, warm, clinical, somewhere in between, harmonics that are pleasing to the ear, harmonics that hurt your ears, fast, slow, 'colored', 'pure', whatever.

We have something that no one has, we have from a technical perspective, an amplifier, of some form that can drive our "perfect" loudspeakers to proper volume levels, without imposing any character of its own, no harmonics favoring, no distortion at all, in an ideal room, with little to nothing between the amplifier and transducer. They are truly "windows". Dispersion, image size, size of speakers are big or small, whatever person preference dictates.

----------------------------------------------------------------

OK. So our speakers don't really exist and our amplifier doesn't really exist, but work with me here. They are simply there to take a signal, make it proper for our perfect loudspeaker, and output it to the listener who is in the most absolutely perfect room, seated in the absolutely best spot.

----------------------------------------------------------------

You have your perfect speaker/driver interface with no worry of voltage or current or matching -- from a technical perspective, its the best it can be, without customizing your sound to the rest of the system.

Your voltage attenuation is absolutely transparent.

The only thing you can mess with for your sound is the recording, the source player (whatever type), and any sort of little gain stage or preamplifier stage, whether in the source itself or in a 'preamplifier'.

I'm not asking whether you would prefer your little gain stage no mater how minimal or complex to be tubes or solid state or something else. I'm not asking whether you prefer your presentation one way or another.

But....

If this amplifier/speaker interface truly existed outside the imagination, wallet, and science, would this be the ideal interface for an absolute tube lover (of any sort)?

Does working at the low levels of amplification provide the most or the least customization of sound, cost and space no object?

Would this be the tube lovers dream, to only worry about the source and a low level signal?

Regardless of cost and profit, if this amplifier/speaker interface/room existed, if you were into DIY or manufacturing, or design, would this be where you'd want to work with a signal for customizing your sound?

This goes for customization from a SS perspective as well, but I use tubes as the example, as tube rolling in and of itself can provide so many changes in sound and presentation.

Thoughts?

DVV · « **Reply #12 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 07:54 am »

Quote from: audiojerry

I have a feeling this is going to be a very long thread...now you've done it DVV!

Where DVV treads, thousands of post views follow.

Jerry, this is one of the oldest and most cherished topics among audiophiles that I know of, so it makes sense we pick it up here as well. My hope is that for a change, we'll exchange some serious ideas and views here rather then get into boxing matches, and so far, even if it's early yet, it seems to be evolving nicely.

Quote

I will admit to having owned too many toys, and I've owned a fair share of debatably highly regarded components of both types. I believe there is a sonic quality that decisively separates the two. It may not be immediate, but it has always been easy to distinguish the difference for me, and even easier for my wife.

But I do not think this difference is due to coloration or lack thereof. I believe it may be due more to harmonics and which order of distortion artifacts are present.

I will get into it more later, but for me, regardless of how resolving, or powerful, or fast, or accurate a solid state amp design is, every one I have listened to at length lacks an organic quality that I have only found in tubes. There is a naturalness and a smoothness that is more agreeable to my nerve endings and allows me to be more relaxed when listening. With solid state I always feel more tense and less satisfied at the end of a listening session.
Quote

Time I made a decent power amp. I know this sounds boisterous, but I do have a few theories which I would like to prove or disprove related to what you called "organic quality", a phrase I very much agree with.

Quote

I do believe, though, that it is more diificult to reach a tube based system's maximum potential, and one needs to be more careful with matching the right speakers, components and cables.

I'd also bet that there are more solid state owners who have permanently crossed over to the bottle side than vice versa. That might make for a good survey.

No need, I think we can conclude you are quite right, to the tune of 90+% of crossovers.

Cheers,
DVV

DVV · « **Reply #13 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 08:00 am »

Quote from: Dan Banquer

Well Jerry you got the main part of this controversey. The stereotype as it exists today is that tubes give lots of even order distortion and SS gives odd order distortion. Note the word stereotype. SS can be designed NOT to give audible odd order distortion and better tube designs can give less distortion. I think the distortion spectra is definetly part of it. The other part is frequency response. Tubes are typically weak in the bottom and top end. If your speaker has a poorly designed tweeter, which is unfortunately the norm these days than cutting the frequency response can be less offensive. If the problem is the speaker, I think people need to address that. If the problem is that acoustic room treatment then that should be addressed. Too often in this business people keep running out and buying different hardware when the problem lies elsewhere.

100% agreed, Dan. Technologies which have nothing to do with the actual problem at hand are blamed, and change becomes the easiest way out - much to the joy of the audio industry.

And I couldn't agree more on the comment about tweeters; I believe this is done intentionally, to emulate the "sweet sound of tubes" in many cases, for which tubes of course should not be blamed.

Quote

Personally my view is that tubes are great for microwave ovens and high power RF. I do not care for the added distortion components or the noise or the heat or the lack of reliability of tubes.

As a solid state man myself, I tend to agree with this, but there were a few times I was enchanted with tube gear. To be sure, in about the same proportion as with solid state gear, which in far too many cases is less than competently designed.

Cheers,
DVV

DVV · « **Reply #14 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 08:14 am »

Quote from: cjr888

...

Thoughts?

An interesting point. I find that when people are presented with an essentially neutral system, even if not perfectly so, they tend to look for this or that, top end and/or bottom end, etc, which ultimately boils down to one form of coloration or another.

I don't mean to say that these were lifeless systems, with no ambience and emotion, I mean to say that the statistically most frequent event is looking for some form of coloration the listener percieves as natural.

Let me use my own system as an example. Several tube freaks, in their spare time my friends, commented that the Karan integrated I run via my 1041 speakers delivers a SET sound without the drawbacks of low power tube gear (as applied to fast drum attacks, or Bach's organ fugues). Again, several other friends, 194% solid state people, commented I was listening to solid state which sounded in between solid state and tubes.

Yet when compared to live music, and I've been around musicians for over 20 years, went to school with some local rockers, etc, I know where that systems falls short of the ideal (ideal taken as realistically achievable, not in absolute terms), just as I realize why this is so (where the weak links are).

Some 12 years ago, I made a small solid state amp, around 30W per side, which I tweaked with input filters and feedback to emulate tubes as most often heard. A very interesting experience, I am sure not the first one of its kind (heck, I remember Bob Carver proposing that in circa 1986 or so), but it did convince me that it's quite possible to make solid state gear which would be taken as tube gear, and that tube gear does in fact color the sound by virtue of its distortion spectrum and frequency response.

I believe, though I haven't actually tried it, that gain has very little to do with that, assuming only one designs for a specific gain (i.e. goes the right way, not the industry way, where several models are derived from one basic design).

Cheers,
DVV

tmd · « **Reply #15 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 10:57 am »

Diary of a wannabe audiophile;
My first foray into something better than the mainstream gear was a Decware Zen A. I bought #54. I had no idea what I was listening to at the time. I guess I had no idea about anything, (still don't). As with all others who own a low powered tube amp, I struggled with speaker selection forever. Steve Deckert says 'if the first watt sucks, why continue' and I always agreed with that. Still do.
I went over to the dark side a while back and now my Zen (since upgraded to select) sits on the shelf waiting for it's next outing. Quite honestly I can't wait to have it back in the spotlight. I don't know if it is all nostalgia or the fact that it was my first love but I don't tend to get as emotionally involved with the music with my all SS setup.
When I have money and the space again, I am going to start looking for a set of very efficient speakers (I definately want to build Steves latest monster Imperial variation) and figure out which source will sound best with them. I will probably still keep a predominantly ss setup as I do really like my 626 Neos but I will probably spend more time listening to the Zen setup.
I have no audiophile terms for the difference and they can't be compared anyway as the systems i've listened to are so different but my experience of the tube sound is just smoother. Maybe that's coloration to the more experienced. I do associate with 'fast' since I heard the Zen amp with RL 2 speakers and haven't heard that with any ss gear I have heard yet.
I guess for me, I don't necessarily see that either is better although I do agree that they both have their strengths and weaknesses but even with the hassle of retubing and the heat generated, I am drawn more towards tubes.
Neil.

cjr888 · « **Reply #16 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 11:04 am »

Quote from: DVV

Quote from: cjr888
...

Thoughts?

An interesting point. I find that when people are presented with an essentially neutral system, even if not perfectly so, they tend to look for this or that, top end and/or bottom end, etc, which ultimately boils down to one form of coloration or another.

I don't mean to say that these were lifeless systems, with no ambience and emotion, I mean to say that the statistically most frequent event is looking for some form of coloration the listener percieves as natural.

DVV

My thoughts. We listen to our own systems. We congregate and listen to other's systems. We go to dealers. We all have different systems, we don't all agree on the final outcomes of systems. We also listen to different types of music -- some simple, some complex, some well recorded, some poorly recorded, some typically distant in a you are there mid-hall perspective, some close mic'ed as if there is a drummer at full size 10 feet from you. So based on our own preferences, listening habits, music, recording quality and everything, we have different expectations, and different goals. I find it rare to see folks fully agree.

So I don't really buy into seeking neutrality. If you like it you like it. I don't see music lovers pulling out scopes and equipment when they go to dealers, I usually see them listening with their ears.

I understand people what people mean when they say they want to be closer, more intimate with the music. I also understand what people mean when they say they want to get the absolute most off of a recording, and when people say they want to get the emotion of the music and couldn't care less for the other stuff -- they wouldn't mind, but that's not their focus.

So if every piece of equipment contributes to that end, and each piece is designed a certain way, and has a certain character, a set of sound attributes, whether intentional or not, let's assume that ideal system matching and neutrality is a goal for _most_ of your system, and also that it's actually _possible_ to create, to evaluate, and to compare against.

So we all need, want, or are used to some sort of coloration, or some sort of embellishment -- 'flesh things out more', 'accentuate this attribute more, 'accentuate this attribute less', 'I like a fuller bass', 'I like my presentation sweeter', 'bigger', 'more pinpoint', 'more diffuse', 'wetter', 'dryer'.....

So when I mention "tube lovers", they have a characteristic of sound. For the sake of argument, we can use the even order harmonics stereotype and the idea of warmth.

I guess I was just wondering if of all your components, if truly neutral components could exist, providing the embellishment in a single place could in theory provide the joys, the 'right sound' as matching a bunch of differently embellished components. And if so, would that be the ideal....limiting it to one place, somewhere at a low level, from the source, and then guaranteeing theoretically that the sound, that source was truly and faithfully passed through to the end.

Sure you could also extend it to the theoretical neutral source, but I think most people like a little of something. The fact that you like one cable over another is right in itself to think that.

Don't know if that makes any sense.

But we're all configuring our sound per se...would be interesting if the variables could be limited.

When I hear of 'system matching' and 'synergy', I hear it from two perspectives. One being the technical one, aka pay attention closely to the design and the interface between each component in the chain, and don't do things that are plain stupid. The second being the gray area, simply stating that component X, Y, Z work wonderfully together through a bit of technical wisdom, and a bit of artistry in mixing and matching.

Don't know where I was going with this....no sleeep.

DVV · « **Reply #17 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 01:08 pm »

Hi Cjr, all,

On agreeing, another curious thing I noticed.

Medical science has proved that our eyes are more sensitive than our ears, that our eyes provide us with more meaningful information than our ears.

Yet, it's easier to see three people agree on which TV set from a choice of say 3 has the best picture, than it is to have them agree which of 3 systems has the best sound.

One objective, physical thing needs to be mentioned here - sounds below 500 Hz we percieve with our entire bodies, not just our ears. Hence the expression "gut-kicking bass", etc. But as far as I know, it's not in any direct relation to size of body, shape, etc, even age at low frequencies (but age has much to do with high range hearing threshold).

Perhaps fortunately, because some girls would otherwise have natural sound deflectors.

Cheers,
DVV

Hantra · « **Reply #18 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 01:28 pm »

I had the coolest experience at work yesterday. I am a network engineer in a manufacturing environment, and there has been so much manufacturing equipment in and out of here over the years, there are tons of spare parts laying around.

I was digging through a bin in the maintenance shop looking for a resistor to tweak my Monsoons on my desk, when behold! I found some NEW tubes! Still in the box, and just waiting there for me were 3 NOS tubes that were minty fresh!

There was a GE 12AX7, an RCA 12AX7, and an RCA 12AU7! Hah! Just one more added benefit to the job. Needless to say, the guys in the shop were wondering what the heck I wanted with those, so they didn't care. I slipped one of the 12AU's in the power supply section of my pre. I didn't notice an improvement over the stock Chinese tube until a few hours later, but it was quite an improvement for the money!

B

Jay S · « **Reply #19 on:** 31 Jan 2003, 02:06 pm »

I had an interesting experience lately in the whole tubes vs solid state debate... how about NEITHER!!??

I heard a passive pre at Guan's place last weekend (my first time to hear a passive) and the music seemed very natural and "right." When we stucka tube pre in the system it just seemed to add an opaque layer over the music. I don't mean this to be a criticism of tubes (as I myself have a tube preamp). But, I think that we have an option to not have either tubes or solid state. The longer the audio chain gets, the more opportunity there is to distort/color the sound and get further away from what is recorded on the CD or record.

If I weren't so lazy, I'd check out the passive pre (no remote) that Peter has designed to match up with his eAR amps.